Dutch website XGB is reporting that Ultra HD which has been in development for several years might hit the market as soon as 2011 or earlier.
Phillips’ senior marketting director Dann Tack says that the technology may be available in Japan by as early as next year with the use of upscaled Blu-Ray discs. This crazy new version of HD is said to run at the resolution of 7680 x 4320 pixels. That’s four times more than current HD!
But the question is, is the market even remotely ready for something like this?
With Blu-Ray sales already looking rough and many people in the market not feeling the need to upgrade from DVD, something like this feels fairly pointless. It’s good to push the marker, but we will be lucky if current HD technology has even been fully accepted into the masses homes by 2011.
I think that the technology is moving too fast for it’s own good and while it is always good to push the boundaries of technology, I fear that this extra leap is unnecessary and will probably struggle to get itself into the market.
source: XGM (translated) via N4G
Last Updated: May 27, 2008
baba
May 27, 2008 at 14:35
2011?
Not going to happen, not even BR in all its glory is going to have enough space to store a full Ultra HD on one disk without compromising image quality. Unless they bring out a 4 layer BR disk, and new players…
baba
May 27, 2008 at 14:40
Sorry for the double post, but I forgot to mention that Ultra HD is actually 16 times the resolution of HD, not 4 times.
moegoe
May 27, 2008 at 14:48
FULL HD, Ultra HD… what’s next????
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t IMAX already capable of 10000 x 7000 pixles?
Can’t find a comparison anywhere… guess we can’t really compare?
doobiwan
May 27, 2008 at 14:57
They have already announced 3 layer BD, and in other news there are already terabyte holographic discs available:
http://www.inphase-technologies.com/products/default.asp?tnn=3
doobiwan’s last blog post..The Games that made the consoles
RossIRSA
May 27, 2008 at 15:01
I have a 42″ at home that does 1080p. And even at it’s size I can’t tell the diffrence when it’s in switched on to 720p mode . so how big would a screen have to be to notice something that crazy hi res?
scotty777
May 27, 2008 at 15:04
wait, will there be consoles capable of playing games at 7000x 4000 whatever pixels at decent prices???
wow, Imagine porn on those tv’s 😛
Nduimiso
May 27, 2008 at 15:25
id rather have the consoles at 1080p, 120fps with as much detail etc as possible.
Fox1
May 27, 2008 at 15:38
So would Ultra HD use HDMI 3.0 standard, thats if it exists?
This will definitely cause a drop in price for 1080p TV’s and that will push the developers to use the 1080p native standard. 😎
hilt_ctn
May 27, 2008 at 15:47
And to see the difference you’d need a screen the size of a full size snooker table…yours for only R1,000,000 ! Buy now or buy disappointed
abe
May 27, 2008 at 16:21
Snooker table? More like olympic sized swimming pool 😯
doobiwan
May 27, 2008 at 18:15
No matter how many pixels you add, Steve Martin is still a ponce, Jimmy Cary doesn’t get funny, and Angelina Jolie only gets scarier.
doobiwan’s last blog post..The Games that made the consoles
larch
May 28, 2008 at 01:16
doobiwan that would be James Eugene “Jim” Carrey
larch’s last blog post..The larch guide on how to spot a forum troll
SlippyMadFrog
May 28, 2008 at 08:35
“Angelina Jolie only gets scarier.”
Amen to that brother!
doobiwan
May 28, 2008 at 11:18
I try to spend as little time on that man, typing included, as possible 😉
doobiwan’s last blog post..The Games that made the consoles
j4nr1k
May 28, 2008 at 13:29
Hey, number 23 was not bad!